Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1887-05-29
TIE SUPREME COURT.

Texas and Pacific Railway Company ct
al. VS.. X. Y. Mangum, from Tarrant;
opinion by Stayton, A. J. This was a
suit for damages for negligence resulting
in the breaking of plaintiffs leg. Appel
liant Glnotchio kept hotel or restaurant
at the depot of appellant railway com
pany on ground leased from the railway
company; piece of wood was used as q
step in getting into Ginocchio's room from
the platform. There was platform for
the use of the train and one for Ginoc-
Chio's customers.
The wooden step was little distance
from the house and appellee, in leaving
It, caught his foot and falling, broke his
leg.
1t is complained that appellant Rail
way Company did not have the platform
properly lighted.
There seems have been no reason for
Joining the railroad company as one of
the parties, because it appears
from the evidence that GinoCChio
owned the hotel and had q lease on the
ground, and the railway company was un-
der no obligations to light the platform
in front of his house. The company was
in no way connected with the hotel, save
as landlord, and shared in none of the
profits, and is no more liable than If the
hotel was on Ginocchio's Own premises
Ginocchio was alleged to be G resident of
Harrison county, to which he set up a
sworn plea in abatement. This is not an
an action founded on crime, etc, which
authorizes the action TO be brought where
the crime was committed, and the article
of the Revised Statute which provides
! that "Wnere there are two or more de-
PENDANTS in different counties, suit may
| be brought in any county where one re
Sides" only means that ii one who is a
/ proper or necessary party resides in the
county where suit is brought, the other
| defendants who reside in other counties
may be Joined with him. There is no
evidence that any of the railway com
pany's platform was out of repair or that
they ought to have kept any place lightsa
! that was not. The Judgment is reversed
and the cause Temanded.
| Joe Harris vs.. j. G. Montgomery, from
/ San Saba county; opinion by Willie, c..
/ }. This was a suit against appellants to
remove q cloud from the title TO some
/ land which they bought under execution
at sheriff's sale. The land was levied
on as the property Of L. j. CadY. Appel
/ lee Claimed to have bought the land from
/ Cady and wife previous to the sale, and
that it was the separate property of Mrs.
/ C2dy, end that appellants had notice of
these facts before any bid was made at
! the sale. Several minor ques,
tions OF practice arise in the
case, one of which is the
assignment Of error in everything appel
| lant'S eleven special exceptions. Such an
assignment is so contrary to the rules
! that we cannot consider it. Appellants
claim that the judgment under which the
! execution issued was recorded before the
/ sale TO appellee. 1t is q well settled rule
/ that q creditor claiming q mere statutory
! lien by the record Of g Judgment, or the
| levy Of sn execution against the husband,
! in whom the apparent title
| is vested, cannot be protected
against a resulting trust in favor
of the wife, etc, and purchase of the
| property st the execution sale viii take
nothing against the wife's equity if the
purchaser have notice before buying. The
/ only question, then, before the Iury was
whether the land w2s MIS-. Cady'S prop
! erty ct the time appellee bought of her,
end the court properly so stated. The
| objection that the money with which the
land WAS bought was not Mrs. C6dy's
cannot De considered because not
raised by g proper assignment Of
/ error. The assignment that the verdict
/ is not supported by evidence because it Is
not stated IN what respect 1t fails to sup
port If is no error, and the judgment
is affirmed.
j. NJ. Soweu, ct u. VS. Ada Jones, ct
al, from Comancbe; opinion by Willie,
CD In this case below the court sus-
tanned general demurrer to The petition
Appellants claimed traCt5Of la1d; sew
eIal years before Moses Jones, father of
appellees, and Dinah Pope obtained q
Judgment for the land and after eight
years it was reversed by the Supreme
court. Pending the appeal appellants
compromised the suit with me guardian
of Ada and Cadie Jones (AIoses being
dead and TOOK deed for the land APP
penants then moved 100 miles away
and were living there when the mandate
was returned, and relying upon the COM
promise did not appear when the case
was called Dinah Pope, who had not
compromised, dismissed her cO-plaintifs
from the cause and took Judgment
against appellants Appellants took no
legal steps to set aside the judgment, and
at the next term Ada and Cordie Jones
and Agnes LocEhart came into court and
smended their petition without any no.
tlce to appellants and took Judgment
against them. The object of the Pc
tition was to set aside the judgment Ghd
obtain q new trial. When Dinak Pope
dismissed the cause as to her CO. plain
tifs, and they having notice, it was the
same as they had entered nOlle prosequi,
and it was an error to allow them to
come in again as DsrtieS IS they should
have begun a new suit for Judgment
against appellants. The petition was
sufficient as against the demurrer. The
Judgment will Therefore be reversed and
the cause remanded.
McIlhenny Co. VS.. W. a. Craddock,
from Bell; opinion by Stuyton, a. j. It
Is urged that the court erred 10 admitting
in evidence the deed OF assignment. The
assignment is full enough in every partic-
ulsr save perhaps in relation TO matters
that would not invGlidate It.
1t is urged that the assignment was
void because it stipulated from release
for such creditors es might consent to
take under it. This does not make ia
void because the objection that it did not
make right of such releases dependent
upon the receipt OF one-third Of the
amount due IS regulated by statute The
judgment viii be affirmed.
McIlhenny Co. vs. S. ". Miller, from
Bell opinion by StaytoE, i. j This was
an assignment under the Sc of March "a,
1873, and Wklle it does not in terms de~-
clare that the property enumerated under
il is all that the assignoS, owned, except
regulating s1Sh an assignment says
Asbc fna nj 20